The Relationship between Language Learning Strategies and Students’ Motivation in Learning English as A Second Language Nurul Ajleaa Abdul Rahman Prof. Dr. Nooreiny Maaarof Faculty of Educational, National University Malaysia
ABSTRACT
The research is aimed to investigate the relationship between language learning strategies and students’ motivation in learning English as a second language. The sample of this study was 140 polytechnic students in Shah Alam, Selangor. The data were collected using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and a motivational questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed descriptively and inferentially using correlation. Findings show that, motivation correlated positively with all types of language learning strategies. The study implies that (1) polytechnic students tended to be more extrinsically motivated in learning English as a second language. (2) Their motivation in learning English was found significantly correlated with their language learning strategy use.
Keywords: Language learning strategies, motivation in second language, learning, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
ABSTRAK
Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji hubungan antara strategi pembelajaran bahasa dan motivasi pelajar dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggeris sebagai bahasa kedua. Sampel kajian ini adalah 140 pelajar politeknik di Shah Alam, Selangor. Data telah dikumpulkan menggunakan Inventori Strategi untuk Pembelajaran Bahasa (SILL) dan soal selidik motivasi. Data yang dikumpul telah dianalisis secara deskriptif dan menggunakan korelasi. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan, motivasi berkait secara positif dengan semua jenis strategi pembelajaran bahasa. Kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa (1) pelajar politeknik cenderung untuk lebih motivasi luaran dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggeris sebagai bahasa kedua. (2) Motivasi mereka dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggeris didapati berkait rapat dengan penggunaan strategi pembelajaran bahasa mereka.
Kata kunci: Strategi pembelajaran bahasa, motivasi pelajar dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggeris sebagai bahasa kedua, motivasi luaran dan dalaman
INTRODUCTION
The aim of the educational system in Malaysia is to produce individuals who are balanced intellectually, emotionally, spiritually, and physically to create a harmonious and well-integrated society (KPM, 2004). The classroom environment is an important determinant of student learning in educational system (Fraser 1994, 1998a). Students learn better when they perceive the classroom environment more positively, thus the study of classroom environment has become a concern to educators, researchers, administrators of school system and parents. Numerous researches on classroom environment or climates have been conducted years ago and have provided a lot of valuable information for educators and researchers on students’ perceptions of classroom environment (Anderson &Walberg, 1974; Fraser, 1989, 1998a, 1998b; Nielsen & Kirk, 1974; Saldern, 1992). Based on Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of social cognitive development, the classroom environment is the “culture” that determines students’ learning development. In classrooms, students’ learning development is taking place when interactions between students and teachers or among the students themselves occur. With the existence of friendships (high affiliation) and teacher support in classrooms, students’ level of learning would be improved.
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY The students are the first semester in Polytechnic, Selangor. They come from different backgrounds, ethnic background, education and language proficiency. The Malaysian government has made great efforts to improve English skills in vocational and technical education. It is a serious problem because of a lack of interest and poor basic principles of English in Malaysian vocational and technical students as reported that Vocational and Technical college students have limited abilities in speaking, reading, writing or understanding the English language (The Office of Vocational Education Commission, 2008).
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Many Malaysian students have problems in learning and communicating English in schools. They tend to have low self-concept and self-efficacy when using English as a tool for communication (Choy, 2002). These situation decreases students’ motivation to participate actively in English language classroom. Students have individual needs when learning English language such as the need for more meaningful interactions with their learning environment and teachers. Through the interactions, their confidence will be developed and motivation to learn the English language will increase. According to Koh (2007),
the dropout rate for secondary school students in Malaysia was 9.3% in urban areas and 16.7% in rural areas. There were over 14,600 students in year 2006 and more than 15,400 students in year 2004 had been caught playing truant. These kinds of school failure and dropout may represent the low student academic motivation in classroom (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meege, 2008). Students who fail in the English subject do not mean that they are less able or weaker than other students in class, but this is because they do not engage in classroom activities sufficiently. The lack of involvement in tasks is commonly described as a deficit of motivation (Anderson et al., 2004). Classroom environment plays an important role in motivating students to learn English language because the process of learning takes place mostly in the classroom. Moreover, teachers did not give much support or focus on the students who were weak in English language; they were more concerned about discipline. The organization of the class by the teachers is an important factor for the effectiveness of instruction (Creemers, 1994) and motivation. Some of the teachers in secondary school could not organize the classroom activities well, this is due to the problem that some teachers are assigned to teach subject such as English language for which they have little education or training. It is an aspect that needs to be focused on by school teachers, administrators, and Ministry of Education.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study was to discover the relationship between language learning strategies on students’ motivation and to know the level of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among students in learning English language. This paper also aims to study the students’ perceptions of classroom environment in relation to their motivation in the classroom of Polytechnic students.
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY 1. To examine the level of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among students in learning English as a Second Language. 2. To investigate the relationship between language learning strategies and students’ motivation in learning English as a Second Language.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What is the level of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among students in learning English as a Second Language? 2. Is there any significant relationship between language learning strategies and students’ motivation in learning English as a Second Language?
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The learners' types of motivation play an essential role in learning English as a Second Language. Additionally, different levels of their achievements may be impacted by two types of motivation. It is, therefore, essential to investigate the relationship between two types of motivation and students’ English learning achievement. The findings of this study revealed, it should describe the state of students’ motivation in vocational context of Malaysia. The knowledge gained from this study can add to the data base for practice, research and theory. In practice, this could be used as a basis for administration, management and to plan for efficiency and effectiveness in technical level and to raise technical colleges’ competitive abilities to international levels. Additionally, it could help encourage teachers to select activities and tasks that tap students’ motivation and improve their achievements. Many recent studies were based on Gardner and Lambert’s theory. For instance, research conducted by Degang (2010) showed that students were found to be about equally motivated both instrumentality and integratively to learn English. Jehdo’s (2009) study indicated that the subjects’ motivations were mixed between instrumental and integrative motivation. In Pruksashewa et al (2008) findings, it was found that all of the students in this study, whether they liked or did not like studying English, were motivated by both types of motivation: integrative and instrumental motivation. According to Puengpipattrakul’s (2007) results, it showed the highest level of significant relationship between integrative and intrinsic motivation. Although many researchers reported their studies conducted with undergraduate students, little study has been done in the context of vocational or technical students. The lack in the literature regarding studies on Malaysian technical students’ motivation and achievement has been another motive to investigate these factors. It can be seen that in Malaysian, there is a lack of studies conducted on motivation in vocational and technical context. It is, therefore, worth conducting this study to research and report the relationship between language learning strategies and students’ motivation in learning English as a Second Language.
Since the amount of information to be processed by language learners is high in language classroom, learners use different language learning strategies in performing the tasks and processing the new input they face. Language learning strategies are good indicators of how learners approach tasks or problems encountered during the process of language learning. In other words, language learning strategies, while unconsciously used in some cases, give language teachers valuable clues about how their students assess the situation, plan, select appropriate skills so as to understand, learn, or remember new input presented in the language classroom.
Besides developing the communicative competence of the students, teachers who train students to use language learning strategies can help them become better language learners. Helping students understand good language learning strategies and training them to develop and use such good language learning strategies can be considered to be the appreciated characteristics of a good language teacher (Lessard-Clouston 1997:3).
LITERATURE REVIEW
LEARNING STRATEGIES
Learning strategies are defined as specific actions, behaviours, steps and techniques used by learners to enhance their own learning. It seems to attract learners to help them to remember things better or to do tasks more efficiently. Oxford, 1990 informs that the word strategy origin from the word ‘strategia’ that means generalship or the art of war. It also defines as the management of troops and ships in a war situation. She points out the tactics to achieve the success of the strategies. Nisbet and Shucksmith (1986) define learning strategies as “the process that underlies performance on thinking tasks.” Learning strategies is also called as rules, principles and procedures used to facilitate learning that applicable to a variety of specific learning tasks.
LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES
Language learning strategies (LLS) are seen as a shift from focusing on teachers and teaching to learners and learning. Cohen (1998) defined such a shift when he states that “one potentially beneficial shift in teacher roles is from that of being exclusively the manager, controller and instructor to that of being a change agent, a facilitator of learning, whose role is to help their students to become more independent and more responsible for their own learning. In this role the teachers become partners in the learning process, language learning strategies are different from teaching strategies (the techniques used by teachers to help learners learn) in that, the learner and not the teacher, is the one who exercises control over the operations of the designated activity (O'Malley et al. 1985). Griffiths (2003) defined LLS as specific actions consciously employed by the learner for the purpose of learning language. According to Mohamed Amin Embi (2000), language learning strategies are plans and/ or actions that learners take to improve their process of language learning. Language learning strategies are used by learners to
facilitate their language learning in different language skills such as listening, speaking, reading and writing.
Language Learning Strategies are applied by learners to assist and facilitate their language learning in different language skills such as speaking, reading, writing and listening. They are divided into two major classes; Direct Strategies (Memory, Cognitive and Compensation) and Indirect Strategies (Metacognitive, affective and Social). Cognitive theory has left a great impact on the formation of LLS so much so that the characteristics of information processing are clearly visible on some of the definitions given (Kamarul Shukri & Mohamed Amin Embi, 2010)
One of the earliest researchers in this field, Rubin (1975, p.43) provided a very broad definition of learning strategies as “the techniques or devices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge”. In 1981 (pp.124-126) she identified two kinds of learning strategies: those which contribute directly to learning, and those which contribute indirectly to learning. The direct learning strategies she divided into six types (clarification/verification, monitoring, memorization, guessing/inductive inferencing, deductive reasoning, practice), and the indirect learning strategies she divided into two types (creating opportunities for practice, production tricks).
Under production tricks, Rubin included communication strategies. This is a controversial inclusion since learning strategies and communication strategies are seen by some as two quite separate manifestations of language learner behaviour. Brown (1980, p.87), for instance, draws a clear distinction between learning strategies and communication strategies on the grounds that “communication is the output modality and learning is the input modality”. Brown suggests that, while a learner generally applies the same fundamental strategies (such as rule transference) used in learning a language to communicating in that language, there are other communication strategies such as avoidance or message abandonment which do not result in learning. Brown (1994, p.118) concedes, however, that “in the arena of linguistic interaction, it is sometimes difficult.....to distinguish between the two”.
Ellis (1986) is another who views strategies for learning and strategies for using, including communication strategies or “devices for compensating for inadequate resources” (p.165), as quite different manifestations of a more general phenomenon which he calls learner strategies. He argues that it is even possible that successful use of communication strategies may actually prevent language learning since skilful compensation for lack of linguistic knowledge may obviate the need for learning.
Ellis (1994, p.530) also concedes that there is “no easy way of telling whether a strategy is motivated by a desire to learn or a desire to communicate”. This inability to differentiate clearly between communication and learning strategies does nothing to simplify the decision regarding what should or should not be included in learning strategy taxonomies such as Rubin’s and others’, and leads to what Stern (1992, p.264) acknowledges is “a certain arbitrariness in the classification of learning strategies”.
When O’Malley et al (1985) came to conduct their research, they used the definition of learning strategies as being “operations or steps used by a learner that will facilitate the acquisition, storage, retrieval or use of information” (p.23), a definition originally used by Rigney (1978). In an attempt to produce a classification scheme with mutually exclusive categories, O’Malley and his colleagues developed a taxonomy of their own identifying 26 strategies which they divided into three categories: metacognitive (knowing about learning), cognitive (specific to distinct learning activities) and social. The metacognitive and cognitive categories correspond approximately with Rubin’s indirect and direct strategies. However, the addition of the social mediation category was an important step in the direction of acknowledging the importance of interactional strategies in language learning.
Oxford (1990) took this process a step further. Like O’Malley et al (1985), she used Rigney’s definition of language learning strategies as “operations employed by the learner to aid the acquisition, storage, retrieval, and use of information” (Oxford, 1990, p.8) as a base. Attempting to redress the perceived problem that many strategy inventories appeared to emphasise cognitive and metacognitive strategies and to ascribe much less importance to affective and social strategies, she classified learning strategies into six groups: memory strategies (which relate to how students remember language), cognitive strategies (which relate to how students think about their learning), compensation strategies (which enable students to make up for limited knowledge), metacognitive strategies (relating to how students manage their own learning), affective strategies (relating to students’ feelings) and social strategies (which involve learning by interaction with others).
These six categories (which underlie the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) used by Oxford and others for a great deal of research in the learning strategy field) were further divided into direct strategies (those which directly involve the target language such as reviewing and practising) and indirect strategies (those which provide indirect support for language learning such as planning, cooperating and seeking opportunities). Although Oxford’s taxonomy is “perhaps the most comprehensive classification of learning strategies to date” (Ellis, 1994, p.539), it is still, of necessity, somewhat selective since “dozens and perhaps hundreds of such strategies exist” (Oxford, Lavine and Crookall, 1989, p.29). Oxford (1990) acknowledges the possibility that the categories will overlap, and gives as an
example the metacognitive strategy of planning, which, in as far as planning requires reasoning, might also be considered a cognitive strategy. She also deals with the difficulty of whether a compensation strategy such as looking for synonyms when the exact word is unknown is a learning strategy or a communication strategy. Although Ellis (1994, p.539) comments that compensation strategies are included “somewhat confusingly”, Oxford (1990, p.49) justifies including such behaviours as learning strategies on the grounds that they “help learners become more fluent in what they already know [and] may lead learners to gain new information about what is appropriate or permissible in the target language”. However, she acknowledges that (p.17) there is no complete agreement on exactly what strategies are; how many strategies exist; how they should be defined, demarcated, and categorised; and whether it is - or ever will be - possible to create a real, scientifically validated hierarchy of strategies....Classification conflicts are inevitable.
THEORIES ON LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES
Language learning strategies are increasingly attracting the interest of educators because of their potential to enhance learning. In the light of this interest, I would like to take a look at the theory underlying language learning strategies beginning from the perspective of the various other theories, methods and approaches from language learning strategy theory has developed.
Derived from the way Latin and Greek were taught, the grammar-translation method, as its name suggests, relied heavily on the teaching of grammar and practicing translation as its main teaching and learning activities (Richards, Platt and Platt, 1992). The major focus of this method tended to be reading and writing, with very little attention paid to speaking and listening. Vocabulary was typically taught in lists, and a high priority was given to accuracy and to the ability to construct correct sentences. Instruction was typically conducted in the students’ native language. This resulted in, as Richards and Rodgers (1986, pp.3-4) put it, the type of grammar-translation courses remembered with distaste by thousands of school learners, for whom foreign language learning meant a tedious experience of memorizing endless lists of unusable grammar rules and vocabulary and attempting to produce perfect translations of stilted or literary prose.
FACTORS AFFECTING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
Gardner's model introduces the four individual differences which are believed to be the most influential in second language acquisition. These include the variables of intelligence, language aptitude, motivation and situational anxiety (Giles and Coupland 1991).
Motivation is defined as the learner's orientation with regard to the goal of learning a second language. Motivation is divided into two basic types: integrative and instrumental. Integrative motivation is characterised by the learner's positive attitudes towards the target language group and the desire to integrate into the target language community. Instrumental motivation underlies the goal to gain some social or economic reward through L2 achievement, thus referring to a more functional reason for language learning. Both forms of motivation are examined in light of research which has been undertaken to establish the correlation between the form of motivation and successful second language acquisition.
1.
Motivation in Second Language Learning
Motivation is the process through which individuals are driven to increase their action or performance either by internal (intrinsic) or external (extrinsic) factors (Forman, 2005). Motivation is viewed as a dynamic, situated and social construct (Norton, 2000) and closely related to learners’ identity construction (Dornyei, 2005; Gao et al., 2007; Gardner, 2000). According to Yu-mei (2009), motivation is one of several important factors that may influence students’ English achievement. Learners’ motivation has been widely accepted as a key factor which influences the rate and success of second/foreign language learning (Ellis, 1994; Mcdonough, 1983). Among the factors influencing students’ learning, motivation is thought to be an important reason for different achievement. Motivation is a very important factor which determines the success or failure in second language learning because motivation can directly influence the frequency of using learning strategies, willpower of learning, goal setting, and the achievement in learning (Li & Pan, 2009). Therefore, motivation would explain why students ignore or achieve learning English. The investigation of language learning motivation is an important field in language pedagogy since it is seen as one of the key variables contributing to the successful acquisition of a foreign or second language (Kormos & Csizer, 2010). These studies revealed a variety of results that reflected the complexity of examining motivation in language learning. Moreover, several studies in the foreign and second language field have acknowledged the social and contextual influences on individual motivation. Most importantly, these studies were concerned with what kind of motivation led to higher proficiency achievement (Gardner et al., 1997; Mills et al., 2007).
2.
Role of motivation in language learning
Gardner and Lambert (1972) introduced the notions of instrumental and integrative motivation. Instrumental motivation refers to the learner's desire to learn a language for utilitarian purposes (such
as employment or travel or exam purposes) in the context of language learning. On the other hand, integrative motivation refers to the desire to learn a language to integrate successfully into the target language community. In later research studies, Crookes and Schmidt (1991), and Gardner and Tremblay (1994) explored four other motivational orientations: (a) reason for learning, (b) desire to attain the learning goal, (c) positive attitude toward the learning situation, and (d) effortful behavior.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES AND MOTIVATION TO LEARN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
According to Dornyei (2003), learning strategies are techniques that students apply of their own to enhance the effectiveness of their learning. In this way, strategy use constitutes the factors of motivated learning behavior. ‘Motivation is a necessary component of strategic behavior and a precursor to strategy use (Weinstein, C et al., 1988).’
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH DESIGN
This study adopts the descriptive survey approach. The specific survey method in this study is the questionnaire survey. This study attempts to discover the relationship between language learning strategies on students’ motivation and to know the level of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among students in learning English language. This paper also aims to study the students’ perceptions of classroom environment in relation to their motivation in the classroom of Polytechnic students.
RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
Two instruments were used in this study: Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) developed by Pintrich (1986) and The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) by Oxford (1990).
a. The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), developed by Pintrich and his colleagues, is mostly used to assess students' motivational orientations and learning strategies (Pintrich, D. Smith, T. Garcia, and W. J. McKeachie, 1991). This instrument is a Likert scale that consists of 81 items, and have six motivational scales (31 items measuring value, expectancy, and affective component) and nine learning strategies (50 items measuring cognitive and metacognitive strategies, and resource management strategies). b. The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) is planned to study students' frequency of use of six systems of language learning strategies. The six systems, proposed by Oxford (Oxford, 1990), include three direct language learning strategies (cognitive, memory, and compensatory strategies) and three indirect language learning strategies (metacognitive, affective, and social strategies). RELIABILITY
A pilot study was conducted to measure the reliability level of the questionnaire items. To do so, 30 students had randomly selected from the target population. These students do not take part in the actual study. They were required to present their personal information based on the Likert scale of the questionnaire items. By using The Statistical Package for the Social Science Program (SPSS) version 17.0, an analysis of item reliability was determined through the reliability coefficient test.
DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES
Before distributing the questionnaire, the students were informed of the objectives and significance of the research. They need to state their true and honest responses. In addition, the subjects were informed to ask for any clarifications they might have. Then, the questionnaire was distributed. Once they finished answering the questionnaire, they were requested to check their responses for incompleteness or missing answers.
DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
The quantitative data of the questionnaires were analyzed in terms of means, using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and percentages.
SUBJECTS
The subjects of this study consisted of the first- year diploma students in Shah Alam, Polytechnic. The subjects of this study were 140 students. Consequently, the students were divided into two groups: 70 students in each group. The English grades average of the first year of their study was used to divide participants into two groups: high achievement and low achievement groups. The 70 students are diploma in civil engineering were the high achievement group because they got highest English grade average in the first year of their studies while 70 students are diploma in building service engineering were the low achievement group because they got lowest English grades average in the first year of their studies.
RESULT
WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION AMONG STUDENTS IN LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE?
In terms of intrinsic motivation, the mean score for item 3 was the highest. This means that the most satisfying thing for students in English classes was trying to understand the content as thoroughly as possible. Meanwhile, in terms of extrinsic motivation, the mean score for item 7 was the highest. This means that students wanted to get better grades in this English language class than most of the other students.
Descriptive statistic analysis was used to answer the second research question in this study: What is the level of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among students in learning English as a Second Language? Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations of students’ motivation in English language classroom.
Table 1: Means and Standard Deviations of Students’ Motivation in English Language Classroom
Motivational Scales
Means (M)
Standard Deviations(SD)
Intrinsic Motivation
17.75
3.97
Extrinsic Motivation
21.45
4.09
Table 1 shows that students rated their level of extrinsic motivation in their English language classroom highly, that is M=21.45, SD=4.09. While the intrinsic motivation is rated with M=17.75, SD=3.97. This means that the level of extrinsic motivation in the students’ English language classrooms was high. It also implies that the students focused on getting good grades and approval from others. The level of intrinsic motivation in the English language classroom was lower than the level of extrinsic motivation.
IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES AND STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE?
The first research question concerning the relationship between language learning strategies and students’ motivation in learning English as a Second Language, the scores on the motivation and strategy use were obtained through Pearson product moment correlation coefficients. Meanwhile, the assumption of linearity was checked before obtaining Pearson correlation coefficients. Results showed that there were not many outliers in the two sets of scores. Besides, there was a linear relationship between the two sets of scores. Thus, the basic assumptions were met. The overall use of strategies correlated significantly and positively with motivation (r = 0.52). The correlation coefficient was significant at 0.01, indicating that the higher use of L2 learning strategies was associated with the higher levels of motivation; the more motivated the learners were, the more frequently strategy will be used was reported. In addition, motivation, in general, correlated positively and significantly with memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective and social strategies. All coefficients were found to be positive and significant, though not very high. Thus, the higher levels of motivation were associated with the more frequent use of all types of strategies. Meanwhile, the correlation between the compensation strategies and motivation was found to be the highest (r = 0.49, **p < 0.01), but the correlation between the affective strategies and motivation was found to be the lowest (r = 0.31, **p < 0.01).
DISCUSSION The results from this current study showed that motivation seemed to have a direct influence in the use of language learning strategies, which is in line with the findings in other research studies (Ehrman & Oxford, 1989; Oxford & Nyikos, 1989). The results indicated that the students tended to have higher extrinsic motivation, personal goals and motivational strength. They also have a moderate degree of intrinsic motivation, while they have a comparatively low degree of learning anxiety. The possible explanation for the result of the present study is that most students learn English only because that an English diploma could assist them to obtain a good job.
Graduates tend to be more proficient in learning English than undergraduates, and sufficient exposure to English and intensive English training could provide them many opportunities to be familiar with western culture which arouses their strong interest in English learning, meanwhile, after two-year of oral English practice, graduates tend to be more confident when communicate with others in English, and in turn build their confidence.
The result shows that the strongest predictor of strategy use among the motivational scales is Motivational Strength. Yang argued that greater strength of motivation corresponded with more frequent use of strategies (Chang Chaing-yi, 2003). In the process of learning, students would probably make full use of all strategies suitable to them. Besides, a specific and achievable goal could positively influence their motivational strength and hence influence the choice of learning strategies. The finding of this study is somewhat similar to the results of Schmidt’s (2001) study. The result shows that cognitive and metacognitive strategies are the types of strategies which are mostly affected by motivation. Besides, learners possibly prefer memory strategies because they believe that memory strategies are effective and convenient, and rely on affective strategies to make themselves relax and control their emotions in their language learning.
Since the result of the study reported that motivation in learning English as a second language is significantly correlated with the use of language learning strategies, and both are significant for achieving better foreign language. Therefore, an English teacher should understand more about students’ motivation and strategy use in order to assist students to achieve better results in language learning.
Based on the results of current research, all motivational factors tended to be important factors in successful language learning. Perhaps, some general suggestions for instructors and educators are as follows:
Firstly, teachers could reinforce students’ extrinsic motivation. As the result of the study indicates, students’ motivation in learning English tended to be more extrinsically motivated. Behaviorism shows that reinforcer is any consequence that strengthens the behavior it follows. Teachers could positively reinforce students to become active participants by the employment of different kinds of teaching methods and be responsible for their own learning through setting reasonable but challenging goals in order to enhance their extrinsic motivation.
Secondly, teachers could assist students to make a goal suitable for them, enhancing their motivational strength and help them hold positive attitudes towards English learning. This study shows that personal goal and motivational strength are two important factors for students to choose certain learning strategies. Thus, English teachers should help learners to establish proper and specific shortterm goals which are achievable for them. Through achieving these short-terms goals, their confidence and motivation can be greatly increased, which will motivate them to reach their long-term goals. Besides, teachers may give constant feedback on students’ progress, assist them to put their best efforts into learning the language and encourage them to have positive attitudes toward errors and failure during the process of language learning.
Thirdly, teachers could establish intrinsic reward system and employ various teaching methods. Although, students are more extrinsically motivated rather than intrinsically motivated, intrinsic motivation is more closely associated with overall strategy use compared with extrinsic motivation. Therefore, intrinsic motivation should be encouraged. Teachers can assist learners to create their own intrinsic reward system through utilization of existing needs. Students came to classes with different needs; therefore, teachers can help students identify their needs and assist them in finding selffulfillment during the process of learning. Besides, teachers should employ as many varied teaching methods as possible with EFL learners. Schmidt et al. (1996) asserted that students’ interest could be enhanced “by using varied materials, by starting lessons with questions that put the learner into a problem-solving mode, by relating instructional material to topics already of interest to learners, and by the use of paradoxes and puzzles”.
Finally, English teachers should cultivate and raise their awareness of language learning strategies. According to the results of this study, some students indicated that they do not really use these strategies for their English learning even though they know the strategies are available. Consequently, it is very crucial for students to understand the importance of using language learning strategies in the process of language learning. Once students are aware of the advantages of using strategies in their language learning process, they will be willing to and appropriately employ these strategies to facilitate their English learning.
CONCLUSION Motivation and language learning strategies have both been shown to play a role in L2 learning. A study on the various factors affecting students’ motivation should be carried out so that the findings could be useful for researchers and teachers in improving students’ achievement. In addition, the researcher should conduct a research using a different framework, especially one which is new. English teachers should evolve effective teaching and learning strategies for English language to develop students’ motivation to the subjects. To encourage students to become self-motivated independent learners, instructors should design effective course contents and create an atmosphere that is open and positive to raise students’ motivations. The English lecturers should enhance students’ integrative motivation for the better and effective students’ perceptions in language learning. The motivation correlated positively and significantly with the language learning strategy use, suggesting that the more motivated L2 learners would use more language learning strategies. Perhaps, more motivated L2 learners in classrooms are more willing to invest time and effort required to engage in strategy use conductive to L2 learning success. Finally, this study was just a step in exploring motivational orientations, language learning strategy use and their relationships.
REFERENCES
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. Chamot, A. (1987). ‘The learning strategies of ESL students’ in Wenden and Rubin. Chang, Ching-yi. (2003). The Effects of Language Learning Motivation on the Use of Language Learning strategies Among EFL Learners at Technological Universities and Colleges in Taiwan. Unpublished doctor’s thesis, Spalding University, US. Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Dornyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31, 117-35. doi:10.1017/S026144480001315X, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S026144480001315X Dornyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, Orientation, and Motivations in Language Learning: Advances in Theory, Research, and Applications. Language Learning, 1, 3-32. doi:10.1111/1467 9922.53222, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.53222 Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah: NJ. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University. Forman, R. (2005). Teaching EFL in Thailand: A bilingual study. PhD thesis, University of Technology, Sydney: Australia. Gao, Y. H., Zhao, Y., Cheng, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2007). Relationship between English learning motivation types and self-identity changes among Chinese students. TESOL Quarterly, 41,133-155. Gardner, R. C. (2000). Correlation, causation, motivation and second language acquisition. Canadian Psychology ,41, 1-24. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 266-272. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House. Gardner R. C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A. M. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning: An empirical investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 344-362. Gao, Yihong, Zhao, Yuan, Cheng, Ying &Zhou, Yan. (2003a). Motivation Types of Chinese College Undergraduates. Modern Foreign Languages, 26, 28-38. Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold. Griffiths, C. (2003). Language learning strategy use and proficiency: The relationship between patterns of reported language learning strategy (LLS) use by speakers of other languages (SOL) and proficiency with implications for the teaching/learning situation. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Auckland, New Zealand. Hudson, G. (2000). Essential introductory linguistics. New York: Blackwell. Kamarul Shukri Mat Teh & Mohamed Amin Embi. (2010). Strategi pembelajaran bahasa. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Malaya. Lessard-Clouston, Michael (1997) "Language Learning Strategies: An Overview for L2 Teachers" on The Internet TESL Journal
Biodata:
1. Nurul Ajleaa Binti Abdul Rahman Faculty of Educational Studies Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
E-mail:
[email protected]
2. Prof. Dr. Nooreiny binti Maaarof Faculty of Educational Studies Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia E-mail:
[email protected]
